Connect with us

News

Chief of the Iraqi Militia Threatens To Kill US People If America Re-elects President Trump

Published

on

Chief of the Iraqi Militia Threatens To Kill US People If America Re-elects President Trump

An Iraqi militia leader has vowed to kill US citizens if President Donald Trump is re-elected by the US in November.

Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of the Iraqi Popular Mobility Forces, was one of Iraq’s officials who was killed last week during the drone strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

Al Telbawi suggested American civilians will be the target of terror attacks.

Now Jawad Al Telbawi, the commander of one of the PMF factions, says US civilians could be targeted if Donald Trump was re-elected to the Oval Office in November.

Al Telbawi suggested that the target of terrorist attacks would be U.S. civilians.

After threatening the ‘fool and a blackmailer’ of Trump and the U.S. military, Al Telbawi also requested that the U.S. citizens ‘pressure’ Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq ‘before we ship your army back into a coffin.’

“If the American people re-elect Trump to the US presidency [in 2020], this would mean they support his crimes,” said Al Telbawi.

“This could change our position towards the people of the United States. All American interests will be at risk in the region.”

News

Watch NBC’s Seth Meyers Basically challenge Bernie to politicize COVID-19 Crisis

Published

on

Watch NBC's Seth Meyers Basically challenge Bernie to politicize COVID-19 Crisis

One of the slightly disturbing aspects of life at the time of COVID-19 is seeing the working world of late-night TV hosts like mine.

All now knows the mono-paw essence of every day’s urge to work from home, including very rich comics who say their dad stories about Donald Trump. It’s not living a fantasy as you thought it was going to be, is it, Seth Meyers?

One distinction between Meyers and me is that I don’t do my job with a conspicuously lined 18-inch book shelf behind me, which I consider to be a theme that plays itself on each of these ersatz collections. Another distinction is that Meyers gives softball interviews to leaders like Bernie Sanders, while I rip them down.

Sanders appeared on “Late Night with Seth Meyers” in an interview reported by the Media Resource Center on Monday. If you were anticipating something adversarial — or even probing — you were tuning in to the wrong series, men. This was like one of those town hall-style gatherings that politicians held with their own followers, save for one supporter who asked the kinda-sorta presidential nominee (let’s face it, it’s over) to politicize the COVID-19 issue.

And there was the standard opening bell on how Sanders was juggling his job in the Senate and his campaign. That could have lasted, maybe, a minute. Instead we moved straight into the game of baseball.

“One of the moments, or one of the special aspects about this time, is how it helps a lot of people re-evaluate the existing health care system,” Meyers said.

“Could you really think about how this time will be different if we had a program like ‘Medicare for all’ and the shortcomings in the existing system we’re dealing with? “If there was anybody in the Sanders Campaign, off-camera, aiming a pistol at Meyers ‘head, he definitely didn’t make it appear.

Sanders ‘response was, well, predictable: “Thank you for asking the question, Seth, and I think the answer is pretty clear. Right now, as we speak, millions of people are losing their jobs. Any 87 million individuals have no health insurance or are under-insured.

Was Bernie Sanders politicizing the situation of the coronavirus?

“Anyway, people are sitting right now at home, terrified to death that someone in their families is going to come down with the flu. We don’t know if they’re going to pay for the care they’re getting, let alone the other health issues their relatives have. “Well, I’m not just a noob when it comes to late-night conversations with Democratic lawmakers. Such issues are usually set at the stage of political ads, and they’re dumb. Yet what made the Sanders-Meyers interview special was how much Meyers wanted Sanders to politicize the pandemic.

The next question had to do with Sanders ‘time on the Senate floor during the discussion on the coronavirus bill, in which, as Meyers put it, Bernie said sarcastically, “those across the aisle thought like the legislation was too good to the less affluent, to the poorest People” over unemployment insurance.

“In those moments of sarcasm, is it — is it just masking a simmering anger it you feel when your coworkers respond like that? “Sure,” said Sanders. “Look, you’ve got people in the Senate, my Republican colleagues, who voted a trillion dollars in tax breaks for the 1% and large corporations, and yet, in this stimulus package … what we’ve said is, over a four-, in this terrible time when people are so worried about how they’re going to feed their families … that for four months, we’re going to add 600 dollars to what you’re normal.

“We saw some of my Republican colleagues say, ‘Think, there would be some low-income people who will potentially receive more from their unemployment benefit than they did before they earned 10, 12 bucks an hour. We can’t allow this to happen! ‘So to me, it’s so disgusting, so gross, so unethical that I was compelled to think about it.’ And no, there wasn’t a lot of Meyers ‘question on whether or not that would motivate people to stay unemployed. Then, we have Sanders ‘policy of demonization: “So hideous, so disgusting, so unethical.” It is a pretty mean campaign advert.

Moving on, here’s Meyers: “One of the other issues that has always been a critique of the type of health insurance that you’ve suggested is that critics would think, ‘Well, there’s moving to be fair treatment, there’s going to be long queues, there’s going to be death panels.’ And then, it feels that there are now — some voices on the right are arguing that, ‘Yeah, that’s actually how it’s happening throughout a pa. Most of the people who are really at risk, you’ve had to kind of make an economic decision about whether to – what importance to place to their lives. ‘Is it incredible to you when you learn it? “It’s beautiful, of course,” said Sanders. “It’s beautiful, because it points to the cynicism of these people.” Yeah, a few things. First of all, I figured that these kinds of videos had to be followed by: “I’m Bernie Sanders, and I approve of this post.” Is this a breach of the Federal Election Commission? Or are we just saying that Sanders doesn’t have much of a campaign to go back to when it’s all over?

Additionally, Meyers is an amateur softball player. The thing I’ve noticed about these interviews is that they’re going so much faster if you ask a question that at least makes you look like you’re trying. Is there something about Italy’s socialized health care system? What is how we’re going to pay for everything Sanders has to offer? You might also go along with the issue of whether conservatives are worried with incentivizing unemployment.

Rest confident that Sanders has the answers to all questions. Not good ones, at least according to my expectations, but they do have solutions. I say this because I say that every nominee has addressed the campaign trail. Just go for one of those guys. Let him just tee off. The solution was so clear that it was frustrating.

Most notably, at a moment like this, is politicizing COVID-19 on late-night TV exactly what we need?

It was a opportunity to get us closer, not to serve as a political cover for a hopelessly far-left leader reminding the conservatives how unethical and disgusting their actions are. Did you want a distraction? Chances are, no matter where you fall on the political continuum, you ended up with a blood pressure spike from Monday’s interview. I figured we were going to stop them.

Okay, that’s just an interview. I hope you tuned in on Tuesday, as the star of the marquee was Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Yes, no. He wondered why she had not yet supported Sanders as president.

Continue Reading

News

Ugly Bette: Trump’s Excessive Envy of Obama Would Ruin Us All

Published

on

Ugly Bette: Trump's Excessive Envy of Obama Would Ruin Us All

Hollywood actress Bette Midler fears that President Trump’s “overwhelming envy” of Barack Obama “would ruin us all.” Trump’s anti-Trump star lashed out following Wednesday’s news that the White House had agreed not to reopen Obamacare’s markets to new consumers.

Trump’s administration has decided against the re-opening of the Obamacare Healthcare.gov marketplaces for a limited enrollment window, according to the Politico report.

The study also noted that the Affordable Care Act also provides for special enrolment for individuals who have lost their workplace health benefits, in some jurisdictions who have already re-opened their own insurance markets.

Enraged by the report, Bette Midler responded to the White House announcement by writing that “there is no end to the brutality and malignancy of @realdDonaldJTrump and his horrific government.” “His sheer envy of @Barack Obama is going to consume us all,” she said.

There is no stop to the brutality and malignancy of @realdonaldJtrump and his grotesque government. His utter envy of Barack Obama is going to ruin us all.

Obamacare Exchanges Will Not Reopen, Trump Says https:/t.co/E9GB2kLVe0—bettemidler (@BetteMidler) April 1, 2020 Breitbart.com reports: President Trump promised to “repel and destroy” Obamacare. Although the 2017 vote to amend the Act actually failed to do so by a slim majority in the Senate, the President effectively repealed the individual mandate section of the Act. His administration also supports the case filed by Republican-held states who dispute the law’s legality.

Bette Midler has consistently expressed her antipathy to President Trump and his policies on social media. In a February tweet, the actress said that if the president wins re-election in November, “he will control you before he dies, you die, or both.” Her February tweet was written in response to President Trump’s satirical meme.

Continue Reading

News

Putin is sending Coronavirus Health Supplies to the United States

Published

on

Putin is sending Coronavirus Health Supplies to the United States

President Vladimir Putin has sent a planeload of medical equipment to the United States to help combat the epidemic of coronavirus.

Russian planes, fitted with much-needed supplies, departed Russia for the US on Wednesday following Monday’s phone call between President Trump and President Putin.

On Tuesday, the Russian Embassy announced that “Russia will send a plane with medical supplies and safety devices to the United States by Thursday.” Russian State TV reported that the flight had begun early on Wednesday morning, according to Reuters.

Putin is sending Coronavirus Health Supplies to the United States

Nypost.com reports: “Trump gratefully accepted this humanitarian aid,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday, Reuters reported, citing Interfax News Agency.

The Russian Embassy said on its Twitter page that Moscow had provided the assistance, while Trump estimated the death toll in the US could be between 100,000 and 240,000, and hoped that the Trump administration would return the gain if the epidemic in Russia became significant.

“Importantly, when providing assistance to American colleagues, President Putin is motivated by the following consideration: as medical equipment suppliers gain momentum, they should be able to reciprocate if necessary,” said the post.


# StopCovid19 Specifically, while providing assistance to American colleagues, President Putin is motivated by the following consideration: as medical equipment suppliers gain traction, they would be able to reciprocate if necessary – # Peskov https:/t.co/tFzUo330ga – Russia in the United States (@RusEmbUSA) on March 31, 2020 Trump said he talked to Putin on Monday and indicated that Russia will give

“I have to admit that we have enjoyed a strong friendship with a lot of nations,” Trump said. “China gave us a few items, which was awesome. Russia has given us a very, very big airload of stuff, medical devices, which was quite good. “Russia has confirmed more than 2,000 cases of the virus, but other health professionals have doubted the quality of the results.

Continue Reading

News

Mad Maxine: ‘Idiot’ Trump Should ‘Pray Forgiveness’ for Coronavirus

Published

on

Mad Maxine: 'Idiot' Trump Should 'Pray Forgiveness' for Coronavirus

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) has yelled “idiotic” President Trump over his reaction to the coronavirus outbreak, asking that he pray to God for forgiveness.

“Putin, please stop congratulating yourself! You’re a mess, and you’ve mishandled the # COVID19 tragedy! You’re not competent, and you know little than experts and generals, “Waters posted on Twitter on Monday.

“Your arrogance and stupidity are shameful, and you continue to show it every time you open your mouth! “Putin, you inept jerk! You sent 18 tons of PPE to China early but ignored warnings and called COVID19 complaints hoax, “Water added.

Trump, please stop congratulating yourself! You’re a mess, and you’ve mishandled the # COVID19 tragedy! You are not competent, so you know little better than specialists so generals. Your arrogance and weakness are shameful, and you continue to prove it every time you open your mouth!

—Maxin Waters (@RepMaxineWaters) March 30, 2020 “Trump, you inept fool! You sent 18 tons of PPE to China early but ignored warnings and called COVID19 a hoax. You put at risk surgeons, nurses, assistants, [sic] orderlies, & janitors – all risking their life to save ours. Pray 4 mercy for the hurt you have done. “She also applied.

Trump, you inept cunt! You sent 18 tons of PPE to China early but ignored warnings and called COVID19 a hoax. You’ve threatened surgeons, nurses, aides, orderlies, & janitors — all risking their life to save our life. Pray 4 mercy for the hurt you have done.

—Maxine Waters (@RepMaxineWaters) 30 March 2020 Breitbart.com reports: Waters ‘remarks came after she accused President Trump on Sunday of ignoring early signs about the pandemic.

“As you know, we have a Pandemic Office essentially in the President’s office that was locked down, closed down, not funded by the Government of the United States,” the California Democrat told MSNBC host Joy Reid. “That’s the kind of office that’s organizing, that’s preparing, that’s making sure that equipment and anything that’s needed can be readily accessible while you’re getting this sort of catastrophe. And then, even if we didn’t have any sort of preparation in fact, the early updates I’m sure were overlooked. “Following Waters ‘allegations, Trump’s administration made substantial strides in enhancing national monitoring and introduced a public-private initiative dubbed” Project Airbridge “to speed up the supply of medical supplies to the U.S. On Sunday, the first flight arrived in New York, carrying 130,000 N95 caps, 1.8 million face masks and gowns, and more than 10.3 million hats.

In fact, on Monday, Ford revealed that it would be working with GE to install 50,000 ventilators for 100 days. White House Defense Development Act Director Peter Navarro welcomed the announcement. “Just as Ford’s production moved smoothly from vehicle to tank production during the Second World War over the last century, the Ford family is partnering with GE Healthcare to use its incredible technological and manufacturing expertise to actively help this country address one of its most urgent problems. We applaud the commitment and look forward to the first ventilators to roll off the Michigan assembly line in record time – and we’ll be there to celebrate the landmark, “Navarro said in a statement.

Because of Tuesday morning, the U.S. has 164, 719 coronavirus infections and 3,170 deaths, according to reports from John Hopkins University.

Continue Reading

News

Soros-Funded Outlet: COVID-19 Crisis Is Ideal Time To ‘Kill the Kids’

Published

on

Soros-Funded Outlet: COVID-19 Crisis Is Ideal Time To 'Kill the Kids'

OpenDemocracy, a George Soros-funded non-profit in the U.K., is using the coronavirus pandemic to promote their anti-family agenda.

Today, when I say the “anti-child” campaign, I simply mean that the party is pushing for an end to the family unit.

In last week’s post, “The Coronavirus Problem Shows It’s Time to Abolish the Family,” a emotionally ill woman named Sophie Lewis — yes, I only inferred her gender — tryes to persuade her readers that the COVID-19 pandemic is precisely the moment to liberate herself from the “nuclear family.” How does poor Sophie think this? Okay, as in most home settings now, she writes, “there is the mystification of a couple-shape; the romanticization of parenthood; and the sanitation of a inherently dangerous area that is private property.” Wait, what? Public land is ‘unsafe’ “Romanticizing” parenthood (that means loving your children, isn’t it?) is problematic?

Lewis claims that so many families today are “identified by the power asymmetries of housework” and that land possession, mortgage payments, and “patriarchal parenting” are bad for our wellbeing.

Nevertheless, Lewis goes on to say that “Queer and feminized people, particularly very old and very young women, are certainly not free” in these “colonial home” circumstances.

There are a host of other strange claims brought out in Lewis ‘post. Much of them are essentially feminist and socialist opponents of how patriarchal the male-headed family is, and why we need a full redesign of how we think of the state and the culture.

Were liberals seeking to make the best of the coronavirus pandemic?

Standard issues for the left, in other words: in socialism, the state always falls before the home. And a look at the OpenDemocracy funders, presented by the organization itself, shows Soros ‘left-wing Open Society Foundations among the biggest donors, along with other radical funders, such as the Ford Foundation.

Perhaps the most absurd argument in the essay is that Lewis claims, “We deserve more than the family. And corona’s moment is an ideal time to begin abolishing it. “What this Marxist wing-nut of open society has in mind to replace the family unit is not written out in any depth, but it uses a number of striking terms to describe what is to come next.

“Far from the moment of acquiescing to the ‘social traditions’ narrative, the pandemic is an extraordinarily valuable period for supporting, evacuating and simply encouraging members of – and refugees from – the nuclear household,” she notes.

From what I can understand, Lewis appears to want the government to provide sex non-conforming trans youth with covers and affordable accommodation that ran away from home so that they could provide a judgment-free safe place to run from. Or anything like that.

In either case, Lewis argues that “the private family qua form of social reproduction still, clearly, sucks.” Why does it suck?

“It’s about the sexes, nationalizes and races us. It sets the expectations for successful work. This lets us feel that we are ‘individuals.’ This minimizes resource costs while optimizing human life-giving labor… “and on and on and on.

Just give me a rest.

It’s nice to see that this utterly unhinged way of thinking won’t be winning momentum any time soon. Men and women are hard-wired by Nature to find a husband, start a family, and raise babies.

In addition, there is anecdotal data that suggests that the coronavirus is potentially getting families back together and that social ties are being reinforced at this time.

I can only believe that the manifestations of kindness and charity that are taking place right now are causing people like Sophie Lewis a huge headache. Oh, that’s a positive idea.

Continue Reading

News

Pro-Life Win: Federal Court Provisions for provisional ban on abortions as ‘not medically required’

Published

on

Pro-Life Win: Federal Court Provisions for provisional ban on abortions as 'not medically required'

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed an executive order on March 22 to prohibit all “surgeries and treatments that are not medically required,” including abortions.

After a district court blocked the enforcement of the order, the 5th U.S. The Circuit Court of Appeals granted a temporary stay of decision, enabling the ban to come into action.

The District Court found that “the reading of the Executive Order by the Attorney General prohibits Texas women from pursuing what the Supreme Court has declared is their fundamental constitutional right to end abortion before the fetus is viable.” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued and a jury of three appellate judges reversed the ruling of the District Court.

“It is directed that the order of the district court of 30 March 2020 (Dkt. No. 40) be Indefinitely Held before further order of this court to give this court adequate time to consider a petitioner’s motion for a stay and a petition for a writ of mandamus,” the federal judges said in their decision.

Abbott’s ban on non-essential surgical services is intended to ensure that adequate hospital personnel are available for the expected flood of COVID-19 patients.

Paxton blamed abortion services for failure to comply with the governor’s order in a statement previous to the decision.


Are abortions medically necessary?

“Abortion providers who refuse to comply with state law show a clear lack of respect for Texans suffering from this medical crisis,” he said.

“For years, abortion has been promoted as a ‘option’ by the same people currently seeking to argue that it is an necessary practice.” While the injunction has been upheld for the time being, Planned Parenthood and other abortion services and supporters are working tirelessly to reverse it.

“Abortion treatment is time-sensitive and critical health care that has a tremendous effect on human health and life, which is why it is covered as a civil right,” Nancy Northup, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Centre for Reproductive Rights, told CBS News.

If successful, ending the lives of unborn children and saving the lives of COVID-19 patients would again be viewed as similarly “necessary.”

Continue Reading

News

Compare Trump’s Critical Media Questions to Obama’s Fawning Issue

Published

on

Compare Trump's Critical Media Questions to Obama's Fawning Issue

There are moments where the term “media bias” really doesn’t cut it because what’s going on is so obvious and so blatantly antithetical to public ethics principles that calling it prejudice is a fundamental understatement.

Even a casual observer watching the manner in which the corporate media handle President Donald Trump during the coronavirus pandemic will pick up his combative posture and his apparent contempt, which also contributes to the most harmless conversations.

This double norm has recently been illustrated by a series of tweets juxtaposing two notable video clips.

The first is that Trump threatens CNN’s Jeremy Diamond this week about his false coverage about the President’s comment.

The second is a video shared in one of the first tweets that shows former President Barack Obama being asked in 2009 about his first 100 days in office by Jeff Zeleny, then The New York Times, but he has since moved to CNN.

In Trump’s first interview, the CNN reporter and the president dispersed over the corporate media distortion on a previous president’s comment. The media attempted to make those comments look like Trump suggested that if he weren’t respected by the state governors, he wouldn’t be meeting for them.

“Your comment and your response and your reaction is a lie,” Trump said to Diamond as he attempted to speak to the president.

The reporter quoted Trump’s initial statement: “I want them to be appreciative. I don’t want them to say things that aren’t real to me. I want to make them appreciative. We did a fine job. And I don’t think about me. I’m thinking about Mike Pence, the task group, I’m thinking about FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers. “Trump said” thank you “when Diamond was mid-sentence as the writer had unwittingly proved the president’s argument.

The clip started with Trump hammering CNN and Diamond over their constant false news coverage.

Contrast this with Zeleny’s 11-year-old clip telling Obama about his first 100 days in office.

The conversation went like this: Zeleny: “Thank you, Mr. President,” he ended. “Within the first 100 days, what shocked you the most about this office? You’ve been really impressed by working in this office? Did you humiliate the most? And you were the most troubled? “Actually, Obama:” Let me put this down now. “The room full of impartial journalists erupted into laughter.

Obama hammed it up and kept writing while repeating the question so that he could answer every sycophant, pandering, saccharin thread.

Apart from this, if that question were written by a middle school boy, his teacher would still be so proud, but this was a columnist from The New York Times, which used to be the record paper for “all the news that fits to be printed” back when it was still a respectable news organisation.

After Obama milked it for all its worth, Zeleny finished, politely, by saying, “Thank you, sir.” During the Obama presidency, the media dropped all over to smash Obama’s ego.

Would you think the juxtaposition of these video samples shows that the government is skewed against Trump?

And after he left office, his presidency was considered scandal-free, save for the moment when he wore a tan suit. (A crisis that The Washington Post was already focusing on only last year, but it could mainly equate it with Trump.) Although the media acted more like Giuliana Rancic than Woodward and Bernstein, concentrating mainly on the hubbub over his indictment, they overlooked the actual controversies that engulfed the administration.

This viral meme from 2018 points out all the other controversies that mass media have apparently ignored, including Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Obama’s mockery of the Islamic State Party as the Taliban’s “JV Squad,” and so on: meanwhile, despite media and Democrats having produced both Russia and Ukraine controversies from scratch and using them as an excuse to go on a mining trip.

In the past, the Republican president would just smile and bear all the scrutiny in an effort to rise above it, but, as shown in an interview with the CNN reporter, at least Trump doesn’t take all of that lying down.

The most troubling part of all this is that these reporters are experts who have worked their way to the top of the media food chain in order to obtain access to the president, who instead using their special role to scrutinize Republican leaders while fanning for Democrats.

This are the media who envision free speech fighters, and still they are oblivious to their own blatant prejudice.

It’s no surprise, though, that the newspapers had a strong rejection rating in the latest Gallup survey. Trusting mass media to objectively say anything about President Trump is like asking a new mother to comment about whether her baby is adorable — it’s just a toss-up on who might give a more unbiased view.

Continue Reading

News

Ilhan Omar, AOC Order Trump to Stop Iran Sanctions ‘Because Coronavirus’

Published

on

Ilhan Omar, AOC Order Trump to Stop Iran Sanctions 'Because Coronavirus'

Radical Democrat Reps Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have called on President Trump to lift US sanctions on Iran.

A number of other Democratic counterparts joined the far-left lawmakers in urging the Trump administration to drop sanctions on the Islamic Republicans due to the current coronavirus pandemic.

“I sent a letter to [AOC] and [Sen. Bernie Sanders] called for an end to [sic] sanctions on Iran after the COVID-19 pandemic, “Omar said Tuesday.

“Such sanctions do not affect the actions of the Government of Iran, but specifically target innocent people,” she said.

I wrote a letter to @RepAOC and @SenSanders calling on this administration to lift sanctions against Iran after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Such sanctions do not affect the actions of the Government of Iran, but specifically target innocent citizens. https:/t.co/odymQAN3cn—Rep. Ilhan Omar (@Ilhan) March 31, 2020 Redstate.com reports: Alexandria also took Trump to task via Twitter, retweeting Huffpost Foreign Affairs Correspondent Akbar Shahid Ahmed: “@AOC @BernieSanders @IlhanMN @ewarren & co want to lift sanctions against Iran that make it impossible to import meds, PPE & respirators amid one of the biggest COVID-19 outbreaks in the world. Let us set aside the conflicts of our countries and lift restrictions to raise human misery. https:/t.co/fRFndKSP39—Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) March 31, 2020 From Huffpost’s article: The Congressional letter, shared with HuffPost prior to its publication, is sent to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin, headed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). Noteworthy signatories include Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Sen.

The letter argues that sanctions must be avoided in order to support civilians in America “and around the globe”: “Allowing this situation to get more severe in Iran threatens significant damage not just to the citizens of Iran, but also to the people of the United States and around the globe.” As it comes to assistance during the pandemic, as far as conflict with Iran is concerned, the letter supports “problems, schmob” Bush White House relaxed sanctions after the 2003 earthquake — and offered aid — as a precedent.

AOC and friends want help for Iran in fields ‘like commercial industry, Iran’s banking sector, and oil exports.’ And it will last, they say, ‘for at least as long as health experts conclude that the epidemic can persist.’ Because we are talking about a virus that, as far as we know at the moment, can only be a disease that persists in the world from now until forever. Depending about how you perceive the “termination” of the situation, of course.

Look like a smart idea, huh?

As The Independent revealed on Tuesday, Pompeo could have indicated that sanctions may be eased: “We continuously review all our policies, and the response is – should we ever rethink? – Of course, of course. … The United States recognizes that this is a global problem, a humanitarian disaster, and we are strongly committed to ensuring that humanitarian aid is given to the citizens of those countries. We care more about the people of those countries than we do for their own members.

Continue Reading

News

NYC ‘Marxist Mayor’ De Blasio: Churches that offer religious services could be ‘closed forever’

Published

on

NYC 'Marxist Mayor' De Blasio: Churches that offer religious services could be 'closed forever'

Bill de Blasio, a democratic mayor of New York City, vowed to indefinitely shutter churches and bar them from conducting services if they did not comply with the government’s recommendations on coronavirus.

The far-left mayor said that while “we need our confidence in this time of crisis,” he allowed the NYPD to “disperse” congregations of worshippers and would not hesitate to order the building to be permanently closed.

“So, I want to say to all those who are planning the opportunity for religious services this weekend — if you go to your temple, if you go to your church and attempt to perform services after you have been told too much not to do so, our law enforcement officers would have no choice but to close down those services,” de Blasio said.

“I’m not doing that with much happiness. It’s the last thing I’d like to do, because I understand how important people’s religions are to them, and we need our spirituality in this time of crisis, but we don’t need meetings that can place us at risk, “he said.

“No practice of faith endorses something that endangers the members of that religion,” de Blasio said.

“So, the NYPD, the Fire Department, the Buildings Department, and everyone has been instructed that if they see worship services going on, they will go to the officials of that congregation and inform them that they need to stop the services and disperse.” “If that doesn’t happen, they will take further action to the point of fines and potentially shut down the building permanently,” de Blasio conti.

“Once again, that’s going to continue this weekend. Again, I’m sorry I have to tell you this, but anyone who hears this should take it seriously, “said the mayor.

“You have been warned; you need to interrupt programs, help people exercise their religion in various ways, but not in crowds, not in meetings that might place people at risk.”

Continue Reading

News

De Blasio Attempts To ‘Permanently’ Close Churches Seeking to Offer Religious Services

Published

on

De Blasio Attempts To 'Permanently' Close Churches Seeking to Offer Religious Services

There are also civil liberties concerns as to whether widespread closures in American society to counter coronavirus dissemination are allowed under the Constitution. That said, there has been a grudging consensus that it has to be done, at least to the point that there has been no significant legal opposition to the numerous lockout measures across the United States.

However, I don’t really know what to do with the danger by New York Mayor Bill de Blasio to “permanently” close down every place of worship that seeks to serve in the face of a citywide moratorium on gatherings.

Yeah, if the congregation wants to work, says the mayor, you will do well.

“If you go to your synagogue, if you go to your church and continue to hold services, despite being advised too much not to do so, our law enforcement officers will have no choice but to close down those services,” de Blasio said Friday, according to a transcript from the news conference.

“I’m not doing that with much happiness. This is the last thing I would like to do, because I understand how important people’s religions are to them, and in this moment of turmoil, we need our religion. But we don’t need meetings that would place people at risk.

“There is no tradition of religion that endorses something that endangers the leaders of the community. So, NYPD, Fire Department, Buildings Department, everybody has been told that if they see religious services going on, they will go to the authorities of the church, they will tell them that they need to interrupt the service and leave. “And if they continue to serve until fines are given, well, poof. De Blasio said the penalties should be the first line of action. Let’s hope that will allow the congregations to stop meeting.

“If that doesn’t work, they’ll take punitive measures to the point of fines and eventually close down the building indefinitely,” he said.

De Blasio: churches and synagogues conducting religious services could be permanently closing pic.twitter.com/kdUsdp2YO—Matthew Schmitz (@matthewschmitz) March 29, 2020 Most of the places of worship in New York City are performing their services online, if at all, and locking down their doors, according to Politico. Still not any of them.

“Unfortunately, a limited number of religious groups, specific churches and specific synagogues do not pay heed to this guideline even if it is so universal,” de Blasio said.

“You were alerted. You’re going to need to interrupt services. Support people express their religion in many ways, but not in crowds, not in meetings that can place others at risk. “Yeah, there is no safer way for recalcitrant religion organizations now conducting services in the wake of a moratorium on mass events to stop than to say,” You have been warned. “There is no doubt that the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom is powerful — too much so.

“There is little in the legislation or precedent to create a general and unilateral declaration of ‘state of emergency’ as an undisputed authority,” Hall wrote in Op-Ed for The Western Newspaper. “There is still nothing in the statute or tradition to justify a limit on the number of persons who can meet in a church, for health purposes or otherwise, as a justification for violating the constitutional right to freedom of worship.” Yet another First Amendment expert, Eugene Volokh, told The Associated Press that the facts surrounding the coronavirus explosion are murky in the seas.

If religious groups argued that they were being called out for special treatment, it would be one thing, Volokh, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, told the AP.

Do you think the government should have the authority to ban the churches from meeting to discourage the coronavirus from spreading?

“But if, for reasons entirely unrelated to the religiosity of conduct, you are only putting the same pressure on everybody, it is likely to be acceptable,” he said.

Of example, it’s not clear if de Blasio’s comment was fully thought out. I would strongly doubt any church who has managed to meet in person in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.

However, despite the questionable legal existence of any regulation restricting the right of speech, how can any official excuse indefinitely closing down a place of worship or a congregation, no matter how ill-informed their decision to start meeting in person was.

And in terms of things being counter-productive, if you’re going to face a court battle over a series of orders given by state and municipal officials in the last few weeks, the legal challenge of ending the right of a religious group to worship in perpetuity is the nearest you can get to a slam-dunk litigation argument.

What part of U.S. case law makes de Blasio believe this is going to come before the courts? We may be in terra nova because of the coronavirus epidemic, but the first amendment also holds here and closing down a school, synagogue or mosque indefinitely does not appear to align with it. Moreover, if anything comes before the court and the injunctive relief is issued, what is to guarantee that other organizations and people do not use it to reverse other state and municipal coronavirus orders? If this occurs, de Blasio could do a disservice of cataclysmic proportions to the cause of public safety.

So even though they’re not toppled — is that actually what de Blasio’s incompetent government needs to waste its time in court talking about? Whether or not the municipal council has the power to effectively extinguish a religious community?

It won’t sound as good in court as it does at a press conference — especially as the coronavirus issue comes to an end, but the ban on the congregation meeting won’t come under de Blasio’s attack. That will be petty dictatorship, pure and simple, in the middle of the coronavirus crisis.

I don’t believe that’s what de Blasio said at all, however, as he could be seen to say something of considerable severity.

This was another politician in front of a camera, trying to look tough. Here we have another public official who imagines himself in the chaos of Aaron Sorkin, who fixes yet another question by doing or doing something dramatic (if not legally sound).

My guess is that we don’t have to think about de Blasio really going through what he said on Friday. The Mayor can have his moment of President Bartlet’s cosplay as soon as anyone with the law chops took him aside after the press conference and said, “Ah, yeah, but about the closure of the church, Mr. Mayor …” There is, of course, the awful chance that de Blasio is crazy enough to follow ahead with this, however. After all, he personally launched a failed presidential nominating bid, operating under the misapprehension that what Americans were really calling for in a president was a bland mayor of the nation’s largest city. (Thanks to de Blasio, his misapprehension was significantly less costly than that of the other man in the sector who made the same mistake.) Had de Blasio wanted to do that, it might not only end up in litigation, it would be the beginning of a legal avalanche that hinders the ability of the state and local governments to handle coronavirus.

Any way, it is a heavy-handed challenge that is almost definitely illegal and does nothing but damage credibility and confidence in Gotham’s ability to deal with COVID-19.

Continue Reading

Popular Searches

Trending